Mother Theresa: Spiritual Hero
-
93,
The abandonment or dryness would apply to both the path of Samekh and the path of Gimel. And to a lesser extent, the path of Tav. These are all paths of dark passage, of an ascent from the (relatively) known to the unknown.
I have, however, been making myself unpopular all weeek by saying I don't see her as a spiritual hero(ine) or saint at all, and denying that the Dark Night is what she actually endured. All three paths (Tav, Samekh, Gimel) are marked by a transition, a growth, whereas she seems to have been trying to get back to her original youthful vision or experience. I suspect she ignored or rejected inner promptings that might have helped her make true spiritual growth.
I'm very glad I'm unlikely to end up dying in one of her hospices. Despite the huge amounts of cash that rolled in, she didn't obtain decent painkillers. She believed greatly in the virtue of suffering, and saw no reason to relieve it in those who were in severe pain. There are also accusations of coerced deathbed conversions among the deperate and frightened.
She was not a woman of much vision or imagination at all, which is why I think she was unable to regain a spiritual vision for all those decades. I'm no fan of Christophe Hitchens (his views on her are all over the web) but in this case, I think he's right. She worked a good schtick, but she was not what her fans make her out to have been.
93 93/93,
Edward
-
93 Sophia Lux and Edward,
Sophia, I could only make guesses as to the location of "dryness" on the Tree of Life, so glad Edward had an answer...
Edward, maybe you are right, maybe not; I don't know enough to say at this point. Perhaps I will have to buy the book in question, which apparantly contains her fairly uncensored letters. Perhaps on reading them carefully, some light will be shed on our own spiritual path; either by seeing her errors, or her successes, or both. But on the surface I would say that even if she suffered and struggled in error, she did so on a scale that was heroic.
-
93 Serpentine,
I assume you're aware that the man who edited and published the letters is the priest charged with getting her canonized? He realized this would be the biggest problem so I think he "pulled a Karl Rove' and turned the liability into a saintly virtue.
I don't deny Momma T had guts and grit. She was a powerhouse. But she was also a woman of narrow vision. I'm not clear exactly what it is that she accomplished, other than building up her order for 50 years. The recognition and accolades aren't coming from Calcutta.
If you want a better Christian example of True Will, I'd rather look at a man like Oscar Romero, who paid for his courage with getting gunned down in his own church at the behest of a psychopathic dictator, while being largely disowned by the Pope who pushed so hard for Teresa to get her official halo. If it was him getting canonized, I'd applaud out loud,
93 93/93,
Edward
-
Wow, interesting stuff and strong opinions. We can learn something from everyone though. I mean she has a lot of power in her own right just from having affected so many people. In that sense she is definitely a spiritual teacher. Not sure what the moral is yet.
Thanks for those attributions--I like to try to think of things in that way, even if I don't fully "get it" yet. It helps understanding.
93/93
M
-
93
I think those three Middle Pillar paths each mark ascent to new levels, not just the taking of steps. The top two, Gimel and Samekh, are related to new initiations, into the 2nd Order (Adepthood) and the 3rd Order (Masters and beyond). Tav is an in-between path - it completes the phase of commencement, and only indicates a shift of levels more subtly. Though Dion Fortune, I think in <i>The Mystical Qabalah</i>, indicates that her passage of Tav was a daunting one. I think most people have some forboding or troubling experiences on it.
A key factor, IMHO, is that the personality level of the aspirant can only persevere on these paths. That is more, than with others on the Tree, the Angel has to do the deep work, from inner levels. Spotting what that's all about, <i>admitting</i> what that's all about, and then allowing ourselves to be guided by it, isn't at all easy. It may be that the process has to become seemingly impossible before it matures and ripens.
I might be being too rough on Momma T. But there are hints in her published letters that she <i>anticipated</i> sainthood as far back as the 1960s. She felt a profound call early on, but seems to have anticipated the glory of fulfilling that call. I don't think we can game-plan salvation or enlightenment, or whatever we want to call it, that specifically.
Then, putting yourself in an administrative position too soon, as she did, is a risky move, because you have to work with the ego to do your 'day-job' . Some of her statements after she got famous are quite petty or silly.
I think she got caught in her own pursuit of grace and glory. She was impresisve, it seems, but not necessarily wise.
93 93/93,
Edward
-
93 Edward, Sophia, et al,
Well, I don't claim to be a Mother Theresa expert and most likely won't become one in the next year or two... I'm reflecting on her life from the little I know of it, and in a sense, now that she's dead and no longer at work in the world, my projections on her are more meaningful to me than whatever she was (if anyone can ever find that out).
I see, from what I know, a woman who believed deeply enough in something, some sense of purpose, to keep going for fifty years when the "thrill was gone". Right or wrong, that sort of persistence is impressive.
From the little I know, it seems that she deeply believed in the value of suffering; that she must have perceived her True Will, rightly or wrongly, as being in service to suffering; as serving and furthering the Path of Mem. She was a sort of Priestess of suffering. It seems true, from the little I've read, that she was not in love with the poor, but with poverty; not in love with the pain-ridden, but with pain itself. It's an exceedingly old-Aeon perception, and the sort of mindset that caused Crowley to turn perhaps excessively against the symbolism of the Hanged Man card, in reaction. In trying to serve her idea of Christ, she may inadvertently advanced the cause of Kali, native to her chosen ground. (But then, I love Kali too, perhaps more than Christ, so that's no barrier to me...)
But her newly exposed dryness of spirit, which I do not believe to be fabricated, regardless of the spin administered, indicates to me the depth of her commitment to this Word of hers, "suffering". Because she created in herself an abyss of suffering to match the outer suffering of those she (helpfully or not) served. In this she reminds me of Reverend Dimmesdale in "The Scarlet Letter", who does not share in the public shame of his lover Hester, but whose flesh bears in secret the excruciating physical mirror to her outer experience.
Dimmesdale eventually acheived salvation by the public confession of his sin; a peculiarly Christian manner of recompense not shared by other faiths. Did Mother Theresa, despite her recorded requests to the contrary, hope to also attain forgiveness through confession and suffering? I don't know. But the whole story is, I think, still heroic in its scope. Remember that for the ancient Greeks, the word "hero" was not a judgement of moral worth, but a practical description of one who was half man and half god; i.e., who lived and loved and fought on a scale beyond that of ordinary folk. Tragic stories of heroes also often involved their tragic flaw; the personality trait that led both to their rise and to their inevitable fall.
And as to recorded instances of silly or petty statements: undoubtedly. All humans say stupid things from time to time. But in today's era of camera phones and Youtube, our momentary lapses become eternal, and we are left with no one to believe in or look up to. And who benefits from that?
-
^ That made a lot of sense to me (resonated?)
Then again I love Kali Devi as well. And the argument of "she didn't use cash to buy pain killers" doesn't really evoke any emotion in me.
I'm wondering about the idea that she persevered even without "the thrill" though. Could this possibly be the True Will--I think not, or hope not. Is the Will/Thelema not naturally accompanied by a sense of Joy?--even in "darkness"? How one could see the virtue of pain without a sense of exhilaration is really beyond me. Maybe I'm too new-school. I mean even your Dimmesdale had a bit of kink (passion?) in him eh?
On perhaps a more intellectual note, I'm interested in this comment: "and the sort of mindset that caused Crowley to turn perhaps excessively against the symbolism of the Hanged Man card, in reaction"
This is something that confuses me in Crowley's writings indeed. I can understand how at the turn of the Century and even toward the middle of it it may have been tempting to turn away in a hard-line fashion form the Christian way. Old AEon indeed--I get that bit. But I have wondered for as long as I've been reading this stuff if there isn't anything to be learned from the path of Christ. Could it still be applicable but in a different way than before? Is the dying god truly dead or just re-shaped yet again? Does he live now as a smaller part of the true mystery?
Probably bigger questions than this thread was meant for. Oh well.
93/93
M^(note my favorite initial. am i biased? am i misdirected?)
-
Serpentine, Sophia Lux, 93,
I have no problem with someone choosing the path of suffering. I seem to follow it myself far more than my professed Thelemic views would indicate.
I do have a problem with inflicting that suffering on others."And the argument of "she didn't use cash to buy pain killers" doesn't really evoke any emotion in me. "
Sorry, but it does in me! I'm just not into pain.Let's admit the woman was complex and determined. Her will in that sense was quite awesome. The problem I have with her is that she is becoming an iconic figure, even to non-Catholics - and for the wrong reasons.
If her long struggle with spirtual dryness or emptiness had been the struggle of a contemplative nun, all well and cool. But she allowed herself to be held up as an example of Christian charity in action, the Spirit manifest in the world of Assiah. She actively courted this for many years. Then you get her interfering in the Irish referendum to liberalize divorce laws (boo, hiss - Jesus doesn't like divorce) followed by sucking up to Princess Diana '"whose 'marriage didn't work out."
And praising the "Torture-cells R Us" Duvaliers of Haiti because they gave her money their own starving nation couldn't spare?
She was a political animal, not a saint. She allowed herself to be portrayed as one guided by her Angel (Christ) when she was groping in the dark and, I believe, not doing a particularly good job of it. But because she was 'Mother Teresa of Calcutta' no-one dared call her on her inconsistencies.
You want to cite Helen Prejean as a modern saint in the Christian style? Check - I'm with you. Dietrich Bonhoeffer, Pastor Niemuller - they're people who, to me, have suffered for putting their Christian beliefs into action, and made a huge moral point that I have to respect.
Okay - I'm starting to feel the steam coming out of my ears, and I'm sure that's not good for my ear-drums. I've made my point five times over, anyway.
SophiaLux wrote:
"I have wondered for as long as I've been reading this stuff if there isn't anything to be learned from the path of Christ. Could it still be applicable but in a different way than before? Is the dying god truly dead or just re-shaped yet again? Does he live now as a smaller part of the true mystery"
I think there is a huge amount to be learned from the path of Christ, and from Christians. "The Christians to the lions" has always irritiated me as a trite saying. But suffering is too easy, in some ways. We're just too good at it, because it seems hard but in fact, much of the time, it's darned easy.
93 93/93,
Edward
-
"She was a political animal, not a saint. She allowed herself to be portrayed as one guided by her Angel (Christ) when she was groping in the dark and, I believe, not doing a particularly good job of it."
I do see what you're saying here. She might have been a fine example for some kind of lesson, but the fact that she hypocritically allowed herself to be held up as a spiritual paragon when there is evidence to the contrary is bothersome.
I like this:
"But suffering is too easy, in some ways. We're just too good at it, because it seems hard but in fact, much of the time, it's darned easy. "
Very good point. Nicely put.
93/93
M" -
She was human, and as such she had feelings, and she couldn't be indiferent of the horrors she saw, and naturally there comes the doubt of god and spiritual "emptyness"(we should carefully meditate on what spiritual means).
We are judging her when we really don't know what she has been through.It is easy to be in a comfortable chair, not worrying about food or illness, not seeing inocent people suffering and dying with no apparent reason, and feel spiritually "full".
We cannot even begin to understand the suffering she had to see and feel in first hand. Try first experience those yourself and let's see where your inner light goes.
If she "hypocritically" posed as a saint with the intention to help(wich she did) than she is more than a hero. True Will is pursuing your dream no matter what , and by all means.